On Tue, Mar 05, 2002 at 04:55:54PM -0500, Bill Perkins wrote:
building on a Slackware 8.0 machine, downloaded all the stuff (flood, apr,
apr-util), can't seem to get it to configure properly- errors out with:
checking for APR... reconfig
configure: error: flood requires a libtool-enabled
On Tue, Mar 05, 2002 at 04:55:54PM -0500, Bill Perkins wrote:
building on a Slackware 8.0 machine, downloaded all the stuff (flood, apr,
apr-util), can't seem to get it to configure properly- errors out with:
checking for APR... reconfig
configure: error: flood requires a libtool-enabled
Chuck Murcko wrote:
I think reverse proxy is usable all the time - mod_rewrite uses it by
generating an internal request. And you can put rewrite+reverse proxy
rules (possibly using [P] flag) into .htaccess.
It's also conceptually less confusing to see adjacent default lines in
the config
To clarify where the code comes from, it is taken from an autoconf generated
configure script.
Cheers,
-Thom
* Thom May ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
Right then. So after a fair amount of discussion on IRC, this is hopefully
the solution to all the configuration issues people have been hitting.
Hi,
I've been working through the renames_pending file in apr.
I have already sent a patch to rename apr_ansi_time_to_apr_time and
apr_exploded_time_t to dev@apr; this is the companion patch for httpd-2.0
Cheers,
-Thom
Index: include/util_time.h
On Tue, Mar 05, 2002 at 05:41:28AM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
rbb 02/03/04 21:41:28
Modified:modules/http http_request.c
Log:
Remove another hack from the server. The add_required_filters
function
was required to make sure that the sub request had the
Why is cvs.apache.org running 2.0.18?
Ryan
--
Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
645 Howard St. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
San Francisco, CA
Graham Leggett wrote:
Tim Moloney wrote:
A little investigation leads me to believe that apr changed its shared
memory API and httpd-ldap has not been updated. Is anyone actively
using and maintaining httpd-ldap for apache 2.0?
It's on the todo list, however reducing the overdraft and
On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 07:05:04AM -0500, Tim Moloney wrote:
Further investigation shows that the new shared memory API in APR does
not include the functionality of the old API. Specifically, the
following functions are missing:
apr_shm_malloc()
apr_shm_calloc()
Wow. Thanks!
On Wed, 2002-03-06 at 10:14, Ryan Bloom wrote:
Sander asked me to send an e-mail about how filters are supposed to work
in the new model, so here it is.
...
If there are any questions about any of this, please let me know.
Ryan
--
Modified:.CHANGES
include ap_release.h
Log:
bump after the tag.
Yes, I have tagged 2.0.33. I won't roll the release until Aaron commits
the path problem fix. I'll announce when the roll is done.
Ryan
Let me just go on record saying that I don't think we're in a
position to release another version.
I'll second that based on problems I still see
with filters - additional post coming momentarily.
Allan
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 09:48:38AM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
Yes, I have tagged 2.0.33. I won't roll the release until Aaron commits
the path problem fix. I'll announce when the roll is done.
Let me just go on record saying that I don't think we're in a
position to
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 09:48:38AM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
Yes, I have tagged 2.0.33. I won't roll the release until Aaron
commits
the path problem fix. I'll announce when the roll is done.
Let me just go on record saying that I don't think we're in a
From: Brian Pane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 06 March 2002 19:35
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 09:48:38AM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
Yes, I have tagged 2.0.33. I won't roll the release until Aaron commits
the path problem fix. I'll announce when the roll is
From: Ryan Bloom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sander asked me to send an e-mail about how filters are supposed to work
in the new model, so here it is.
Ryan, do you want to set a good example by throwing that all in a big pre
section and putting it under httpd-2.0/docs/manual/developer/
A simple SSI file with two #include file directives
will coredump due the fact that we are copying the
filter chain *pointers* from the main request to
the subrequest in make_sub_request. When we add
the subreq_core_filter this corrupts the main
filter chain.
We need to copy the filter chain,
Sander asked me to send an e-mail about how filters are supposed to
work
in the new model, so here it is.
Ryan, do you want to set a good example by throwing that all in a big
pre
section and putting it under httpd-2.0/docs/manual/developer/
That's in my list of things to do, but I most
A simple SSI file with two #include file directives
will coredump due the fact that we are copying the
filter chain *pointers* from the main request to
the subrequest in make_sub_request. When we add
the subreq_core_filter this corrupts the main
filter chain.
There should be no reason to
On Wed, 6 Mar 2002, Ryan Bloom wrote:
| I realize that this is a VERY sarcastic message. I am seriously trying
| to make a point here. Either we are developers all pulling towards a
| real release, or we aren't. I believe that we are.
This was my point during the past email thread re:
The other thing is that we actually want to use the exact same filters.
My patch replaces the ap_filter_t structures from the original
chain with exact copies in the subreq chain so 1) we have the
exact same filter chain and 2) and adds/removes will only affect
the subrequest chain.
That
The other thing is that we actually want to use the exact same
filters.
My patch replaces the ap_filter_t structures from the original
chain with exact copies in the subreq chain so 1) we have the
exact same filter chain and 2) and adds/removes will only affect
the subrequest chain.
I
Ryan Bloom wrote:
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 09:48:38AM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
Yes, I have tagged 2.0.33. I won't roll the release until Aaron
commits
the path problem fix. I'll announce when the roll is done.
Let me just go on record saying that I don't think
in utl_filter.c:351
I just got into a loop where first == first-next
the filter was subreq_core
if (*r_filters != *c_filters) {
first = *r_filters;
while (first (first-next != (*outf))) {
first = first-next;
Yeah, I just saw that bug while trying to remove the previous pointer.
Look down about ten lines, and I had accidentally set
f-next = fscan
fscan-next = f
That was a bug.
Ryan
--
Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
645 Howard St.
Bill Stoddard wrote:
Haven't thought this through, but there is at least one complicated case to consider
and
handle correctly. If the backend is chunking a response back to the proxy and that
response exceeds the size the proxy is allowed to cache, then the proxy would need to
abort the
Igor Sysoev wrote:
mod_accel is not proxy. It's accelarator. It can not work as usual proxy.
I did not even try to implement it - Apache 1.3 is poor proxy. Squid or
Oops are much better.
Until recently you were not aware that the proxy had been updated - I
would look at the code again before
Graham Leggett wrote:
Chuck Murcko wrote:
I think reverse proxy is usable all the time - mod_rewrite uses it by
generating an internal request. And you can put rewrite+reverse proxy
rules (possibly using [P] flag) into .htaccess.
The fix to this is to add a AllowProxy directive to the
On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 10:20:05AM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
...
Let me just go on record saying that I don't think we're in a
position to release another version.
Of course we are. Call it an alpha. If you don't even think that is fine,
then call it a developer snapshot.
...
I won't
I found the source of the bug. The SUB_REQ filter is an HTTP_HEADER
filter, but it shouldn't be. That is a resource filter, because it is
only added when the resource changes.
I have a patch that will fix the multiple includes case, but cvs is
giving me a hard time. I'll post it as soon as I
Actually, I fixed the build for the LDAP stuff so that you should just be able to
check out the whole httpd-ldap tree into httpd-2.0/modules/. then do a normal
configure like the following:
#! /bin/sh
#
# Created by configure
./configure \
--with-mpm=prefork \
--enable-maintainer-mode \
Bill Stoddard wrote:
Haven't thought this through, but there is at least one complicated case to
consider
and
handle correctly. If the backend is chunking a response back to the proxy and that
response exceeds the size the proxy is allowed to cache, then the proxy would need
to
On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 09:14:31PM +0200, Graham Leggett wrote:
The fix to this is to add a AllowProxy directive to the options
directive.
Unfortunately, I think we've run out of bits in there...
-aaron
I found the source of the bug. The SUB_REQ filter is an HTTP_HEADER
filter, but it shouldn't be. That is a resource filter, because it is
only added when the resource changes.
Yes, that's what I just saw and is the source of
at least one of the bugs I've been hitting. I
eagerly await your
Greg Stein wrote:
As Ryan pointed out, there is no such thing as...
Cheers,
-g
You two agreeing on so many things is starting to worry me. It can *only*
be a sign of the end times. :)
--
Paul J. Reder
---
The strength of the
Greg Stein wrote:
As Ryan pointed out, there is no such thing as...
Cheers,
-g
You two agreeing on so many things is starting to worry me. It can
*only*
be a sign of the end times. :)
I actually just sent a message to Greg saying that same thing. :-)
Ryan
On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 11:30:49AM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
Index: server/core.c
===
RCS file: /home/cvs/httpd-2.0/server/core.c,v
retrieving revision 1.159
diff -u -r1.159 core.c
--- server/core.c 6 Mar 2002 18:03:19 -
On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 11:30:49AM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
Index: server/core.c
===
RCS file: /home/cvs/httpd-2.0/server/core.c,v
retrieving revision 1.159
diff -u -r1.159 core.c
--- server/core.c 6 Mar 2002 18:03:19
Ryan Bloom wrote:
On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 11:30:49AM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
Index: server/core.c
===
RCS file: /home/cvs/httpd-2.0/server/core.c,v
retrieving revision 1.159
diff -u -r1.159 core.c
--- server/core.c6 Mar 2002
Anyone else seeing problems getting ./configure to work at all
with autoconf's cache-file under Solaris? Unless I specify the cache-file,
configure will die. That is:
./configure --cache-file=/tmp/my.cache
or
./configure --cache-file=/dev/null
will work, but without
On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 03:51:19PM -0500, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Anyone else seeing problems getting ./configure to work at all
with autoconf's cache-file under Solaris? Unless I specify the cache-file,
configure will die. That is:
No problems here. But, I'm using autoconf 2.52. -- justin
Did that patch fix the bug for everybody? If so, I want to commit it.
I have a three hour meeting now, so I'm not going to have time to
though. Can somebody else commit it this afternoon if it works?
Ryan
--
Ryan Bloom [EMAIL
I'll adjust PATH and see if that's the dependency... It's not libtool
dependent AFAIK (I tried 1.4.2 and 1.3.5).
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 03:51:19PM -0500, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Anyone else seeing problems getting ./configure to work at all
with autoconf's
Yep... Looks like it's no problem with 2.52.
Anyone have hearburn if I adjust buildcheck.sh to make 2.52 the
new requirement?
Jim Jagielski wrote:
I'll adjust PATH and see if that's the dependency... It's not libtool
dependent AFAIK (I tried 1.4.2 and 1.3.5).
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On Wed, 6 Mar 2002, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Yep... Looks like it's no problem with 2.52.
Anyone have hearburn if I adjust buildcheck.sh to make 2.52 the
new requirement?
IIRC 2.52 still produces a non-portable case..esac statement
which fails on FreeBSD.
If this issue happens with
On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 04:08:14PM -0500, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Yep... Looks like it's no problem with 2.52.
Anyone have hearburn if I adjust buildcheck.sh to make 2.52 the
new requirement?
IIRC, FreeBSD's ports package doesn't include anything beyond 2.13.
So, this will cause problems if
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
IIRC, FreeBSD's ports package doesn't include anything beyond 2.13.
So, this will cause problems if we roll on icarus. If I get a
chance, I'll try it with autoconf-2.13 here later on Solaris and see
if I can figure out what is going on.
I'll take a look as well,
Weirdness... Something with how relative paths are being setup
because if using absolute paths for cache-file, 2.13 and 2.52 both
work. By default 2.52 has cache-file /dev/null but if I set to
./config.cache to emulate 2.13, then 2.52 fails as well. No doubt,
the sourcing of the cache file is
Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yep... Looks like it's no problem with 2.52.
Anyone have hearburn if I adjust buildcheck.sh to make 2.52 the
new requirement?
at least a little, but I'm not exactly sure how much :) In the 2.0.30
timeframe a colleage was unable to get make
I see how these will be useful with an Async I/O model, but at the moment
this read mode seems either incomplete or not useful. It seems to me like
all current uses of NONBLOCK are probably unnecessary, since there is no
other way to wait for data to appear other than spinning endlessly.
The
Yep, you've nailed one of the big problems with the bucket/brigade API as it is
currently
implemented. Remember a few weeks back when I talked about how interesting it would be
if
our CGI interface could be made full-duplex? To do this, we need to be able to do
non-blocking i/o plus be able to
[I should have posted this to dev@apr in the first place, so I'll follow
up with the discussion there]
Did that patch fix the bug for everybody? If so, I want to commit it.
I have a three hour meeting now, so I'm not going to have time to
though. Can somebody else commit it this afternoon if it works?
Thanks Ryan, with your patch we longer trap in the SSI testcase but
I have a question. In
Did that patch fix the bug for everybody? If so, I want to commit
it.
I have a three hour meeting now, so I'm not going to have time to
though. Can somebody else commit it this afternoon if it works?
Thanks Ryan, with your patch we longer trap in the SSI testcase but
I have a
a little bit of debug info in case it saves anybody some time:
Input filters for the fake request_rec used by proxy aren't getting
set up right.
ap_proxy_http_process_response() calls ap_proxy_make_fake_req() to set
up a request_rec to be passed to ap_getline().
ap_proxy_make_fake_req() sets
My only other observation is that any filters added in the subreq
must only be added to the top of the rnew-output_filters
chain or must be cleanly removed before the subreq returns
otherwise the main chain will get corrupted. I haven't seen
this happen so far, so maybe this is just a
On 7 Mar 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
rbowen 02/03/06 19:46:33
Added: docs/manual/mod mod_usertrack.xml
Log:
Conversion to XML
Does it strike anyone else but me as odd that the docs for this module
consist, in large part, of an email message from 1998. It seems that we
APACHE 1.3 STATUS: -*-text-*-
Last modified at [$Date: 2002/03/01 23:35:27 $]
Release:
1.3.24-dev: In development.
Jim proposes to TR around Mar 04 or so because of
the Solaris pthread mutex fix and other fixes.
APACHE 2.0 STATUS: -*-text-*-
Last modified at [$Date: 2002/03/05 21:23:29 $]
Release:
2.0.33 : in development
2.0.32 : released Feburary 16, 2002.
2.0.31 : rolled Feburary 1, 2002. not released.
2.0.30 : tagged January 8, 2002.
a little bit of debug info in case it saves anybody some time:
Input filters for the fake request_rec used by proxy aren't getting
set up right.
ap_proxy_http_process_response() calls ap_proxy_make_fake_req() to set
up a request_rec to be passed to ap_getline().
On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 03:02:08PM -0800, Aaron Bannert wrote:
I see how these will be useful with an Async I/O model, but at the moment
this read mode seems either incomplete or not useful. It seems to me like
all current uses of NONBLOCK are probably unnecessary, since there is no
other way
61 matches
Mail list logo
